Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

@tk my interpretation is that her humiliating sock puppet YSW is now being moderated. At least we can hope.

At least we can hope.

But of course I had nothing whatever to do with it, except perhaps by preserving the posts by imaging them in screenshots, as uneditable proof of the mendacity and prevarication of Ainslie and her sock puppet.

Therefore, when Ainslie implies that the "moderation" was due to any action of "Brian Little's" she again lies transparently and makes a fool of herself both at once, without even being asked to.

I reiterate once again: I have Tar Baby sitting here, with 5 good IRFPG50 mosfets, some spares, and another set of IRF830 mosfets, ready to go for side-by-side testing against Ainslie's NERD apparatus.  I contend that it performs without significant difference from the Ainslie device, and it does so on demand without unnecessary (and not understood by Anslie) manipulations or kludges. It can operate _right now_ on the output of a 555 timer that is powered by its running batteries, not an external power supply, and/or it can be operated in "continuous oscillation mode" --- thus not using the Q1 mosfet at all -- or in the long duty cycle modes which heavily stress this mosfet, depending on which one Ainslie is currently favoring in her mendacious "explanations" of her circuit's behaviour.

Any Pope of Skeptics who is seriously considering evaluating the Ainslie claims would be remiss, I think, to avoid taking advantage of this offer of mine. It's a well-documented and tested replication of Ainslie's circuit, her claimed "negative mean power" data, and all other _VERIFIED_ effects that Ainslie claims to have produced. I can even _actually_ boil water with it, something that Ainslie herself has never _actually_ done.

[WilbyInebriated]

Just the fact that you come here and hammer on TK, in this thread mostly, is proof enough.

no it's not... you fucking idiot. if your naked emperor is going to spam post an image of one of my posts and suggest that i meant something OTHER than what i meant, i WILL call him on it. i wouldn't even have to if he could shut his fucking mouth about me, but he can't because... he's upset that i ride him like a rented mule as he does to others (it's that holding up a mirror thing again) and... he's mental, he's obsessed.

You are seen as defending Rose by posting issues that TK is falsifying claims against Rose, when he posts.

i haven't said anything that could even be remotely construed as what you suggest... why don't you SHOW where i have done this with a quote you lying bitch...

Clearly you are wrong about most everything. A waste of page space.

Mags

clearly you cannot substantiate ANY of your asinine, fantastical claims...

[TinselKoala]

Do the Math (tm Rosemary Ainslie). Well.... I did. Did you?

So.  Do the math.  4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 joules per second x 90 minutes of the test period = 22 342 280 joules.  Then ADD the last 10 minutes where the water was taken to boil and now you have 4.18 x 900 grams x (104 - 16) 88 degrees C = 331 156 joules per second x 10 minutes = 3 310 560 Joules.  Then add those two values 22 342 280 + 3 310 560 = 25.6 Million Joules.

Actually.... 4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 Joules. Period. There is no " Per Second" about it. By going further and just multiplying this by 90 minutes of the test period..... what happened to the factor of 60 seconds PER minute? If you have a figure of something "PER SECOND", even if it's wrong, you still need to multiply by 60 seconds PER minute, before you can multiply by 90 minutes PER test period.
Regardless of that..... by multiplying the number of JOULES that it took to raise the water to 82 degrees in the first place.... you are essentially saying that you raised it from 16 to 82 degrees... over and over, each minute. This is clearly ridiculous and wrong. The 248292 Joules is what it took to raise the water to 82 degrees and all that was required over and above that was to overcome its temperature losses to the air and surroundings.
But continue anyway.....
"Then ADD the last ten minutes where the water was "taken to a boil"" but wasn't actually boiling.... and remembering that Ainslie herself has told us over and over that she DID NOT EVEN MEASURE the actual temperature of the water but rather of a thermocouple "over" the load..... we find that she mendaciously starts at 16 degrees again! She uses the 88 degrees rise from 16 degrees to 104, not the "correct" figure.... still wrong.... of 22 degrees rise, from 82 degrees to 104 degrees. In other words she has here added the same quantity twice, into the "calculation", to obtain 331156 Joules... and she still calls it Joules Per Second, then proceeds once again to multiply that by 10 minutes ( but forgets to multiply by 60 seconds PER minute) ........ and then she adds up the whole shebang of bogus numbers and finds a figure of over 25 megaJoules.  And she compares that to a FIVE battery stack instead of a six battery stack, when her scopeshots show a 72 or 73 volt input for this trial.

Her batteries, 6 x 12 V x 60 A-H each in capacity, hold (6 batteries) x (60 Amps) x (1 hour) x (60 minutes per hour) x ( 60 seconds per minute) x (12 volts per battery) == 15,552,000 watt-seconds or Joules at their nominal full charge. Note that the unit dimensions work out algebraically as well as the numbers.
Her input to raise the water to 82 degrees initially was 248292 Joules. Then to go from 82 degrees to 104 (sic) degrees in liquid water, no phase change..... means that the temperature measurement is wrong, for one thing... but let us proceed nevertheless. 22 degrees x 4.19 Joules per gram per degree x 900 grams of water == 82,962 Joules, and once again the unit dimensions work out just as do the numbers, a further check of correctness.
Adding these two correct figures together we have 331254 Joules used to raise the water to 104 degrees...even if it wasn't really. Since we do not know the heat leak rate nor the actual time it took to raise the water to this temperature, we can only guess. If the total experiment took 90 minutes, and if the leak rate was double or even triple the amount used to raise up the water temp in the first place..... well, perhaps we have 1 megaJoule expended in 90 minutes to give us the ACTUAL DATA, that is, the time temperature profile reported. This, against the 15 megaJoules or more in the battery pack.
And if Ainslie expended one million Joules in 90 minutes and a Joule is a Watt-second, that is 1,000,000  Watt-seconds /( (60 seconds/minute) x 90 minutes) == about 185 Watts average power. That's a high figure, based on the high leak rate guessed for the system. Lower... means even more than FIFTEEN such trials could have been done on the charge in the batteries.

But Ainslie claims that this single trial exceeded her battery capacity.... based on THIS CALCULATION SHE PERFORMS, RIGHT HERE, that I have shown is completely bogus. And her conclusions, and her papers, are based on THIS. They are based on this experiment, described by her in several places, and THIS is the calculation she uses to justify her claims of thermal overunity.

Yes, Ainslie.... DO THE MATH. Because anyone who does can see that your entire claim is based on this calculation and others like it. Bogus from start to finish, numbers multiplied haphazardly together willy nilly by someone who says "One Joule is One Watt Per Second" and that "PER never means divide" and believes that liquid water can exist at 104 degrees C in Cape Town SA in an unpressurized vessel, and who believes in adding the same numbers twice into a quantity.... and who has NEVER CORRECTED OR RETRACTED this bogus math or the conclusions based on it.

Not only that... but there were only 700 grams of water to begin with anyway, as she reveals in a later post.

[TinselKoala]

Now... note that that blog post 117 says "NO measureable cost from the battery supply."

Yet look at the scopeshot posted along with that blogpost.... one taken before the mosfet failed.

[TinselKoala]

When I first started working on the Ainslie COP>17 claim in 2009, I used the mosfets that were available to me, the 2sk1548 among them. The grand troll Wilby.... who I did not know about at that time... criticised me for this and OFFERED TO SEND ME THE CORRECT MOSFET , a IRFPG50. He convinced me he was sincere and promised to send the mosfet along to me. So I gave him a mailing address in a PM. Then he laughed at me, because HE NEVER ACTUALLY INTENDED TO SEND ME A MOSFET: he lied, ran a scam on me, tricked me into trusting him and revealing an address to him. He has mocked me for being so stupid as to BELIEVE HIM and to TRUST HIM, a well known internet troll, and he is right to do so. Nobody should trust or believe a single thing that Wilby says because he has committed the most egregious act of dishonesty and trolling against me in my entire experience on the internet. He promised, he lied, and he holds my private information over my head as a continual threat. And he has the temerity to criticise me! What an unmitigated ASSHOLE is Wilby Inebriated, the lying, mocking, false-promise-making Supreme Troll of them all.